OK was having too much fun in windows but eventually reset to test in Lucid.

Please, explain: how was this ---> having too much fun in windows <--- possible?

mikeb wrote:

Ok seems like all worked and ran with save loaded.

Main file and dependency downloaded to modules on sda3 (was unmounted for test) ...they ran and gave the messages.
Both items appeared in the menu (under utility) and the right click unload option worked.

mike

Cool.

Looks like, I'm entering now a point of development where it would be useful to start writing a documentation or at least a quick guide._________________LazY PuppyRSH's DNASARA B.

In this case we have train fever and are making our own layouts with tunnels to make some sort of underground network.
The progarm does actually run quite well in wine but not the editor.

Space exploration, flying, mountain truck driving, rollar coasters.... there's a general escapism theme going on I think
Some nice music software too and video. Generally native is a better deal or the only option.
Actually the oddest one is a windows file recovery program for ext2/3...works really well from those sysinternals guys and a hell of a lot easier than debugfs.

Anyway you went of topic

So are you basically making an sfs handler that appears to the user as a more standard package manager which can access software online or locally with dependancy checking as would be expected..... is that a rough description?

Just could not remember me having such fun in Windows like I do in Puppy.

Maybe I should reboot it?

mikeb wrote:

So are you basically making an sfs handler that appears to the user as a more standard package manager which can access software online or locally with dependancy checking as would be expected..... is that a rough description?

I'm not sure, if I do understand you the right way.

- making an sfs handler

Yeah, basically it is an SFS handler - somehow.

But I do see it more in way like a SFS development kit.

It can be used by users just for the use of local SFS Modules - private use/development somehow.

But it can also be used as a complete development kit by developers of Operating Systems to provide a still small OS with lots of additional applications coming as SFS Modules.

Though, SFS Modules have their limitations, but I'm sure -of course- it's the much smarter way to provide additional applications for an OS. Once a SFS Module is build for the OS there is no future hassle like is so much when installing .pet files.

Since the SFS P.L.U.S. can handle conflicting SFS Modules one can use applications that never will work, when installing them. The SFS Modules converted to SFS P.L.U.S. Format doesn't have only option to load dependent SFS Modules automatically. They can also unload conflicting SFS Modules (when loaded) before loading the wanted SFS Module.

The RunScripts -as you have seen- can be provided built in to the OS and also as Standalone RunScript RoxApp Directory.

So, the user could test additional applications by providing those Standalone RunScript RoxApp Directory. From those SFS Modules, the user wants to use and to keep them, the user can create easily RunScripts in batch mode to be included into the OS - then just do a remaster.

Hundreds of Megabytes of Software added by some KB scripts added to the OS.
Usable out of the box, without a save file etc.pp. usw.usf. ... ... ...

- appears to the user as a more standard package manager which can access software online or locally with dependancy checking as would be expected

No, not really a package manager - as it would be meant by the Puppy Package Manager.

Yes, it can and is supposed to access software online and/or locally.

Dependency checking not like the dependency check for installed packages. If there are dependent SFS Modules needed for its main SFS Module, these dependent SFS Modules has to be defined manually when creating the main SFS Module (eg. JWildFire and Java). Such defined dependent SFS Modules are checked, searched, downloaded and loaded automatically.

So, no hassle for a user to search for a needed Java, Python or what ever.

Such dependent SFS Module -of course- can include just some libraries or what ever is needed to run the application and should not appear in the main SFS Module or in the OS. The developer is completely free to set this up as he/she wants - even to put the Java into the JWildFire SFS Module.

I do prefer to create dependent SFS Modules to be loaded automatically, because several SFS Modules might need equal dependent SFS Modules - like Java.

Most of my Java applications have Java 1.7update13 defined as the dependent SFS Module, which is then loaded just once.

---

This SFS P.L.U.S. SFS Development Kit will be provided like RSHs ScriptBox was offered here for some testings: as a RoxApp Application Directory that will prepare the current used OS for the use of this SFS P.L.U.S. SFS Development Kit just by a single click onto the RoxApp Application Directory._________________LazY PuppyRSH's DNASARA B.

Ah ok so more for package builders... just wanted to claiify as the thread had strayed quite a bit at one point.

So from a users point of view they simply would get a large range of sfs to choose from with built in dependancy handling and easy user interface.

Shame puppy removed the load without a save ability... means people like you have to write workaround scripts. I had a dead easy time loading the devx to build a modem driver many years ago and wine for that matter just by placing a file on a drive .... even as a noob it was straightforward. But you have to workaround the status quo and I sympathise though from my perspective it all seems a little crazy. Its not what you do I have a problem with its why you are having to do it but anyway back to the plot.

Your system sounds like what the slax 7 dev was aiming at as they had a problem with user built packages conflicting and they were trying to establish some form of regulation to make the pieces fit together properly. The puppy way seems to have been to resort to using someone elses distro repositories which has its own problems and of course not a sfs in sight (unless they used slax packages of course..I have). As mentioned before, puppy packages need to be built for puppy and your work hopefully will help in that direction.

I notice Lucid is being taken up again and their quick pet was always popular... perhaps playdayz and rewin might be interested in what you are doing since to me it might fit in well with thier design philosophy.

Yes, for developers it would be some kind of a package builder: SFS Modules Package Builder

Quote:

So from a users point of view they simply would get a large range of sfs to choose from with built in dependancy handling and easy user interface.

Exactly!

What has been discussed for so long time: a small OS including all you would need for a daily work, plus: a large range of additional, easy to use software.

Quote:

As mentioned before, puppy packages need to be built for puppy and your work hopefully will help in that direction.

Yes.

I'm only developing for Puppy Linux.

In creative processes a programmer, a musician or even a painter has got to sort out all the trash and junk that comes in mind to reach the essential of a program/function, song or picture.

The SFS P.L.U.S. Development Kit will be -or actually is- the essentials of my developments that has got to be achieved.

LazY Puppy actually was the trash, the junk, that has got to be sorted out first, to make the SFS P.L.U.S. possible.

By the way: I like your script of mounting SFS Modules. The more I examine and use it, the more I like it. Smart, smart, smart - really!

I'm sure, this will have some more on-the-top-role in SFS P.L.U.S. in the future.

Quote:

Shame puppy removed the load without a save ability... means people like you have to write workaround scripts. I had a dead easy time loading the devx to build a modem driver many years ago and wine for that matter just by placing a file on a drive .... even as a noob it was straightforward.

Sounds like there has been lots of good stuff in earlier puppies which I don't know of and never heard about.

I have entered the forum using Kubuntu 11.04 and using Lucid 525 for a first go on how to produce a puppy by doing installs and remasters. The only older puppy I do know was Muppy, which I have had used for about one year right before entering the forum. Wanted to search for newer Software for Muppy, but could not find any and could not connect to the internet using Muppy - so, used Kubuntu for online stuff.

Was no fun: reboot, reboot, reboot, reboot, reboot, reboot - just like Windows.

Quote:

But you have to workaround the status quo and I sympathise though from my perspective it all seems a little crazy. Its not what you do I have a problem with its why you are having to do it but anyway back to the plot.

Yes, would have been nice, to enter the forum and just downloading SFS P.L.U.S. or something similar.

But it wasn't available!

However...

I will now start to write a short but useful documentation for SFS P.L.U.S. and trying to reduce the package to the absolutely necessary applications. That way I'm hopefully able to publish the first official SFS P.L.U.S. 4.x.x version within the last weeks of 2013.

Muppy by mu who did some cool stuff .
He made a 5 line script to deal with the yaf-splash mess but got ignored and instead a 6k gtkdialog mega script was used instead....I saw it mate if he's listening. Grafpup was an earlier quality puplet he made.

I like my activate script too ..I should have added memory loading ages ago.... was sat with libreoffice, java qt3 and several others all floating in ram yesterday trying out some pdf editing stuff...a right mess but shutdown with not a twinge on the hard drive.

Long lost puppy contributors....I liked how well put together grafpup was and had some useful organised software. Nathanf or Mu had to withdraw due to family problems ..... but even that recollection might be wrong and will further compound my mixup.

Be nice if any thing smart I say got as much attention as the dumb stuff lol...reminds me of getting full focus arriving 5 minutes late at a job out of a years punctual performance while the rest drifted in when they liked all the time.

If the user's Puppy has SFS-Load on-the-fly, then all s/he has to do is to load a program's sfs to use that program. Will additional scripts be needed at all?

Or, is there a more important result achieved through the scripts?

Sorry, I have just overseen this.

Usually sfs_load is all, what's needed, to use programs from SFS Modules. But you would have to use the GUI of sfs_load to load SFS Modules, which is really slow, when several hundreds of SFS Modules are stored at boot partition or in boot directory (I do have currently 437 SFS Modules in a single directory).

It's not clear to me, what scripts you mean. Could you please explain a little more detailed?

Actually you got a mention in the puppy chatroom today...or at least your sfs plus antics ... was quite a bit of interest. He was interested in having a pile of sfs on tap for a live cd or similar and your work seemed to fit his requirements.

Not sure if you want to include sfs3 or not.... there seems fresh interest in puppy 4.31 and a quick test on 4.12 only seemed to lack sfs4 mounting...the rest appeared to function.

The question is not if I want to include sfs3 - it should already work with sfs3.

The question is: why do I get permissions error when trying to download uploaded sfs3 version files.

Quote:

Actually you got a mention in the puppy chatroom today...or at least your sfs plus antics ... was quite a bit of interest. He was interested in having a pile of sfs on tap for a live cd or similar and your work seemed to fit his requirements.

Yes, SUCCESS!

Really, there is a Puppy chat room existing? Did never heard that.

Ok, at least one person/user/member/chatter seems to be interested.

Hm...

Just a single member from the German forum probably would be worth all of this work - since I have done so already.

But just a single member from a (I assume worldwide) Puppy chat room interested makes me feel in deep doubt, all this work and effort would be worth to be done (and published).

Quote:

.... there seems fresh interest in puppy 4.31

Yes, I have noticed that. Though, I'm a bit confused of this.

I think, most people that will come new to puppy don't have such really old computers. For those, who are already puppy users -I think- there are lots of old puppies available.

I'm not on the hunt for always the newest software (please, don't understand me wrong); if so, I would not still using LazY Puppy. I would use my Precised based LazY Puppy version - I'm just keeping and updating this version for later use, if some of my hardware would fail and new one would not work in LazY Puppy.

But, usually evolution (made by humans) is continuing forward - not backward.

And since all the applications are moving forward, there is no need to build new puppies based on older kernels - newer applications won't work then, and users mostly search for the newer applications.

I think it some kind of wasted effort and time to build (e.g.) a community puppy based on what is already existing and working (btw. it is already community edition imho )

However: I'm trying to continue development of the SFS P.L.U.S., since it works really smart over here and I'm convinced, there must be a second person/user/member/chatter somewhere over the world, who might find this useful!

RSH

P.S.

Would you please convert those Main & Dependent SFS to sfs3 version, attach to this thread (or better PM me) so, I can try to upload these converted files?

Maybe there is something wrong with my squashfs file converter.

Btw:

The German forum is existing since 01. Dec. 2006 (first posting ever) and just in some few days the German forum will have its first thread ever, reaching 100,000 views!